Gavin Davidson, a lecturer in social work in the School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work, recently returned from a research visit to Canada funded by the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust (www.wcmt.org.uk). A new law, the Mental Capacity (Health, Welfare and Finance) Bill is planned for Northern Ireland to provide a much needed legal framework for people whose decision making capacity is impaired. In most jurisdictions, including within the rest of the UK, there are separate laws covering mental health and mental capacity. In Northern Ireland it is proposed that there will be no longer be a separate law for people with mental health problems and the Mental Capacity Bill will apply, in a non-discriminating way, to everyone who has impaired decision making capacity. This approach would be unique but some states in Canada have elements of it and so Gavin visited two such states, Ontario and Saskatchewan.  There he spoke with researchers, practitioners, advocates and policy makers about how having capacity as a gateway criterion for substitute decision making works in practice.  In general this approach appears to work well in these Canadian states and provides an appropriate level of protection for people who are able to make decisions about their own lives as well as a comprehensive framework for making decisions for those who cannot.  In Northern Ireland there is the opportunity to learn from these systems, such as their review processes, and perhaps provide an even more accessible and coherent framework. One particularly important aspect of the framework for Northern Ireland will be consideration of how people can be supported to make their own decisions before any form of substitute decision making is considered. It is anticipated that the draft Mental Capacity (Health, Welfare and Finance) Bill will be published for consultation during 2012 and, as well as the potential benefits and protections, it will be important to consider the complex range of issues this new approach may raise. If anybody is interested in this area, Gavin is happy to discuss these issues and can be contacted at g.davidson@qub.ac.uk.    

You can also listen to a podcast discussion between Gavin and Dr Nancy Hansen Director of the Interdisciplinary Master’s Program in Disability Studies at the University of Manitoba on this topic, which was recorded at the School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work at Queen’s in November 2011:http://soundcloud.com/sspsw-qub/episode-7-capacity

Some of the difficulties with this risk paradigm and the evidence base that underpins it have been well elucidated in a range of critiques.[1] Much of what is termed risk factor research or the risk factor prevention paradigm is underpinned by the findings of the longitudinal studies, most prominently the Cambridge Study of Delinquent Development (West and Farrington, 1973), which aim to identify the particular characteristics of ‘delinquency’. The manner in which such research is interpreted at a policy and practice level for example by ironing out a range of caveats is problematic. Characteristics seen in a population of young people who have been involved in delinquency or offending, rather than been viewed as correlates come to be viewed as causal. So clusters of factors such as low self-esteem, poor academic performance, living in a low income household and experience of poor parental control are often viewed as causes of youth offending rather than correlates.

This risk-based orthodoxy must be viewed within a broader sociological context. For one, the emphasis on risk within personal social services, including interventions within the criminal justice system and specifically with young people is focused on strategies of curtailment and responsibilisation. Here the young person with these ‘risky’ attributes or viewed as a ‘cluster of risk factors’ is seen both as an entity to be managed (to reduce the putative risk) and also as a person who is responsible of curtailing their own risk behaviours to the satisfaction of those who view such behaviours as problematic in the first instance. The question of how young people themselves view and interpret such logic or indeed how they may differentially experience ‘risk’ – e.g. as life-affirming and agentic – is one that the canon of risk, at least in certain research domains, has not afforded adequate attention.

Listen to a discussion on risk between Lauren Graham, Researcher Centre for Social Development in Africa (CSDA) at University of Johannesburg (UJ) and Dr Nicola Carr QUB, here. 

It can be argued that the experience of trauma has been over-medicalised and reduced to a relatively narrow set of ‘symptoms’ associated with diagnostic categories such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  This pathological conceptualisation strongly influences mental health professionals’ interventions with victims/survivors of trauma, which then have the potential to obscure important dimensions of the phenomenological experience of being traumatised that are significant to the victim/survivors and their families. Therefore, it is important, to listen to people’s accounts of the impact of traumatic events to achieve a baseline in order to better understand this population and thus plan appropriate professional interventions.

As a first step, this study will ask mothers about the impact of trauma on them and their families using ‘Narrative Interviewing’ methodology. The interviews will be transcribed and analysed thematically sentence by sentence, for (a) inductive themes derived from the literature including; practical reorganisation, changes in individuals thinking /behaviour (symptoms), changes in relationships, ways of coping and making sense (meaning) of the experience and (b) emerging themes and (c) co-occurrence of terms/concepts.

This study will enable the researcher to elucidate a range of practical, psychological and relational adjustment processes in families who have been traumatised, providing insight into the multifaceted impact of trauma in families seeking professional help.  It has the potential to raise multiple areas for further research, and to inform the response of social care professionals to traumatised families.

Research Launch Report

2.30 pm-4.00 pm, Monday 13^th of June 2011-06-08 Wynn’s Hotel, Dublin 

This report is the first Irish study to directly consult with older people about their perceptions of elder abuse. Funded by the Centre for Ageing and Research and Development in Ireland (CARDI) the project titled A total indifference to our dignity: Older People’s Understandings of Elder Abuse brought together research partners from a range of agencies, sectors and disciplines, including Queen’s University Belfast, Trinity College Dublin, the University of Ulster, the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust (NI) and Age Action Ireland, an independent researcher and four peer researchers. Findings show that the current definitions of elder abuse, which centre on the actions or inactions of a person or persons where there is an expectation of trust, ignore wider societal issues like the withdrawal of respect and recognition. This serves to place older people in vulnerable positions. Standard typologies of abuse were recognised by participants, although sexual abuse was not commonly mentioned except when prompted. However, what emerged was a new concept of ‘personhood abuse’. This refers to societal attitudes; how these affect a person’s confidence, autonomy and agency resulting in an inability to say no or to stand up for oneself against abusive acts, words and pressures possibly from fear of negative repercussions such as withdrawal of contact and/or care. Many ways were identified to support older people and reduce the opportunity for abusive actions to occur. They centred on community-based and peer supports through to ‘having someone to talk to’ and being aware of their rights. Continued involvement in community based activity keeps people active and participating in society. For example community transport and clubs, supported people’s access to amenities and opportunities for engagement and were identified as ways to prevent abuse from happening. Enhanced status, resources and support therefore need to be given to these types of community activities to prevent abuse occurring in the first place. These types of supports can enable older people to share their concerns in an everyday setting and to gain informal support and confidence; seeking more formal interventions when necessary. Jill Manthorpe, Professor of Social Work, King’s College London has commented  that there are few examples of older people contributing to debates on elder abuse and so this report will be of interest to policy makers, researchers and practitioners in helping services beyond the island of Ireland. Yet this is only one step in a longer journey to explore older people’s views and experiences. We will need to talk to people who are in different circumstances to complete our picture of what older people want and feel they have a right to expect. The authors of the research would very much like to hear from you with your reactions to the study.

Dr Janet Carter-Anand

Central Rally Ramallah

On the 15^th May, Palestinians across the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and further afield gather to collectively remember their Nakba, or ‘Immense Catastrophe’ . The day commemorates the creation of the state of Israel at the expense of the forced eviction of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees from their homes. The right for these refugees to return to land they occupied before 1948 remains one of the most highly charged issues of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and emotions often run high at these important and symbolic public events.

This year the Nakba Day commemorations have generated global media coverage given the unprecedented levels of violence witnessed at flashpoints on the Syrian & Lebanese borders, in the Gaza strip, in the Shuafat area of East Jerusalem, and at Qalandiya checkpoint, Ramallah. Images of Palestinians involved in the commemorations being shot at with tear gas, rubber coated bullets and on occasion live ammunition have been broadcast around the world.  As part of my research I was in Ramallah attending the Nakba Day commemoration to ascertain the level of factionalism that is evident in the city and to ask questions relating to the role of commemorations as political tools in strengthening unity between factional groups. Having spent the better part of a year developing an understanding of the importance of the Nakba for Palestinians and having lived in East Jerusalem for some 3 months carrying out the preparatory ground work, I was anxious and excited for the day to have finally arrived when I could begin my observations and see first hand what the day was really like.

It would seem that this was indeed the year to be carrying out such work, albeit with the obvious dangers that are associated with conducting work in a conflict zone. The recent Palestinian political reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas meant the issue of factionalism and unity were hot topics of the day. Both leaders were present on a temporary platform erected at Manara Square in central Ramallah demonstrating a commitment to the cause of Palestinian unity in what was a very powerful public display of solidarity. Yet, a split that I had not considered in the lead up to the work, or in the questions that are directing this piece of research, became more evident as the day progressed. This split was not as obvious as it often is between factional groupings that reveal their allegiances through flying separate flags, and wearing factional specific symbols. Rather the split seemed to be generational with younger Palestinians choosing not to march to the Manara Square in central Ramallah and listen to the same political rhetoric they claim to have heard from the perceived elder statesmen of Palestine before. Instead, a significant contingent became detached from the main party and embarked on their own separate procession towards the Qalandiya checkpoint to commemorate in a manner, which they saw fit.

In what appeared to be a snub to the Palestinian Authority who had expressly asked Palestinians not to march on the checkpoint, in excess of 2000 young Palestinian men and women made the 35-minute walk from the centre of the city. Inspired, it would seem, by the recent Arab uprisings in the spring of this year, they sensed the opportunity to seize the initiative and chose the Nakba Day events to publicly call for change. Carrying placards, which call for the implementation of the right of return and flying only the Palestinian National flag, the group moved towards what was inevitably going to be a bloody confrontation with Israeli security forces. The decision to avail of the Nakba commemorations to air their grievances was a calculated and strategic one. It further underscores the power of public commemorations and their highly politicised role in areas experiencing a sustained period of ongoing conflict.

Observing events of this nature, especially in an area where the potential for those attending the public gatherings to be forcibly dispersed, brings with it inevitable personal risks. Unlike members of the press, researchers aren’t afforded the luxury of a bulletproof vest with the letters PhD emblazoned over the chest. Nor are we offered the gas mask that allows photographers to get up close to those at the front of the commemoration without suffering the effects of the tear gas that is supposed to scatter the crowds. In order to get the photographic images that I desired it was necessary for me to time my movements forward towards the group commemorating strategically and at apparent lulls in the action so as to make sure I didn’t get caught by the effects of the tear gas. Needless to say that on several occasions this proved difficult and I had to retreat with stinging eyes and a sore throat! Nevertheless, I managed to get the images I wanted and to successfully make my way back to the relative safe haven of central Ramallah.

At times during the event I felt it was challenging to control my own personal emotions. I found it difficult on occasion not to think of the work as bordering on the irrelevant in the face of such violent clashes and the subsequent fatalities. The theoretical questions that I considered when designing the piece of research in the relative comfort of the postgraduate research room, seemed all a bit distant and removed from the reality of the event. It is suggested that this is not an uncommon feeling for researchers in many areas, including conflict studies, to have. Two days on, I am in a position now to reflect on the event and to temper these feelings with the belief that shedding even a little light on the importance of the Nakba commemorations for Palestinians across the world and being in a position to share the experiences that I have had with a wider audience, academic or not, makes the work worthwhile and in my opinion relevant.

What happens in light of the events on Sunday remains to be seen. In the meantime, the Nakba commemorations continue until the end of May, with educational events and further remembrance services scheduled in a variety of locations across the West Bank and Gaza strip. The potential for serious skirmishes to break out between Israeli Defence Forces and Palestinians involved in the commemorative events remains very real. Some of the main checkpoints, like Qalandiya on the outskirts of Ramallah, have been operating at a reduced capacity and the likelihood of the checkpoints to be closed at any given time remains high. Thus further disrupting the lives of many Palestinians who are fortunate enough to be permitted entry to work within Israel.

For the most part, my attendance at these events is not needed, yet the process of data collection continues by interviewing key figures who were involved on the day and gauging their reaction to the events. The difficulties associated with working in such a volatile and unpredictable region just became even greater after what has been the most important and politically powerful Palestinian commemoration in recent years.

Brendan Browne, 2^nd Year PhD Candidate

What we learn from Saif Gaddafi’s PhD about money, elites and ethics

in Higher Education

Lunchtime debate

at the School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work

Friday 18 March 2011, 12am-1pm

6 College Park, room G26

The paper I gave draws on research from the USA and  the UK on the experiences of older offenders in prison. The paper  examined what is known about older female adults as offenders,  what are the lessons  to be learned from other jurisdictions  in responding to the needs of older female prisoners and highlight  the range of issues and challenges facing policy makers in managing the health and social care needs of this cohort.

Out of the 85,368 prisoners who were held in prisons in England and Wales on March 31^st 2010, 8120 people were age 50 and above, thus representing 9.5 per cent of the prison population.

In terms of offences committed in England and Wales, the majority of the over 50 female prison population are serving sentences between four years and less  than  an indeterminate sentence; and the second highest category  is 12 months,  and  less than  4 years.   The most common offence for this age group illustrated in the Table:  Violence against a person,  Drug Offences,  and Theft.  Out of the this population, nearly half  are foreign nationals (44 per cent), with many serving sentences  for importing drugs. This increase in the older prison population cannot purely be explained by demographic change but is a consequence of harsher sentencing policies which have resulted in courts sending a larger  proportion of criminals aged over 50 to prison to serve longer sentences While it is obvious that the criminal justice system is becoming more sensitive to the special needs of ageing offenders, barriers continue to exist, which interfere with the ability for prison officers to respond more effectively to the challenges this particular cohort raises.

For a full summary of the conference proceedings a copy of the report can be obtained from http://www.acjrd.ie/conference-reports.  The event was reported in The Irish Times and for further details go to http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0217/1224290024642.html

Two lecturers of Social Work, Dr Chaitali Das and Dr Janet Carter Anand, together with three first year social work students, Lauren Donnelly, Naomi Ferguson, and Clair Doherty completed an intensive exchange program hosted by the Social Work facility of KInSS. Both Dr Das and Dr Anand have international experience as social work educators and were keen to promote the benefits of sustainable social work initiatives across borders.

The exchange program received initial funding under the QUB’s Internationalisation Strategy and was supported by school management. “This Indian connection has become quite a talking point amongst students and staff in the School. The way Chaitali and Janet got it off the ground in such a remarkably short time shows just how much interest and energy there is for internationalisation amongst our staff and students” commented Professor John Pinkerton, who has responsibility in the School for  promoting and coordinating internationalization. 

During their visit students and staff explored  the  varied roles and scope of social work in India through classes and visits to a range of  services . They experienced first hand the effects of globalization on absolute poverty, homelessness, unorganized labor, exploitation of women and the degradation of the environment in the Indian context. They also got an opportunity to observe Indian social work strategies such as community development and participation in civil society movements through people’s movements, government, non government and multinational corporate organisations.

In their reflections on the visit the students emphasized the practice relevance, the experiential learning and their discussion with fellow students.

“India was a fantastic opportunity to be a part of a cross cultural learning experience. I have already been able to put into practice some of  the learning I did out there. I would advise any student to get involved in a project such as this”

“ I was  constantly aware of my skin colour, my gender, my culture. That perhaps afforded me a brief glimpse of the experience of members of minority ethnic groups here in Northern Ireland.”

“It  gave us valuable insight into Indian students’  thoughts of social work in the West and social work as an international profession. I would highly recommend an international social work exchange to anyone”.

A presentation on the outcomes and experiences of the International Social Work Exchange Program was made at the SSPSW Seminar Series on 23^rd February. Building on that a Colloquium on International Social Work Exchange is to be hosted by the SSPSWin April involving delegates from NI, UK, Australia and Ireland. Then in October a delegation of students and faculty members from KInSS will be visiting Queen’s to undertake a similar exchange program hosted by the SSPSW staff and students.

For enquiries about the project or colloquium please contact Janet Anand or Chaitali Das on 00 44 (0) 28 9097 5117 or c.das@qub.ac.uk

One can see why concepts like happiness and well-being appeal. They have a ready reference to individuality and subjectivity on the one hand and agency and self-fulfilment on the other. All of these are central references in a time when such a vacuous notion as ‘the Big Society is mooted and even seriously entertained in some quarters. Welfare appears too passive in a context in which people are supposed to be self provisioning and too oriented to subsistence and minimum standards for those who prefer to see the world as a universe unbounded in riches and opportunities open to us all.

None of the new concepts is superior to welfare in describing the human condition and setting up an ideal to which we should aspire. I would argue that happiness and well-being are economically and politically shallow – they are too focused on the mind-sets and emotions of individuals and conceive of social and economic factors mainly as background conditions affecting individual functioning. Society becomes little more than the ‘atmosphere’. Moreover, there is no moral register in happiness – fairness and justice have no place in it and the concept has no terms to deal with unfairness or injustice in underlying conditions which lead to inequalities in the distribution of, among other things,  happiness or chances therefor.

Welfare provides elements of the big picture that are missing from other concepts and approaches.  In particular, it has a clear view of social progress which extends way beyond how happy individuals feel or a happy society. Moreover, welfare’s strong focus on objective conditions is to be underlined in a period when social structural factors are under-emphasised in policy, theory and research but count hugely in people’s everyday lives. We should note, with some irony, that as the conditions of people’s lives deteriorate, public discourse is being directed more and more to their mind-sets, emotions and feelings. Let’s get serious and bring discussions of welfare back to the table I say.

Mary Daly is Professor of Sociology and the author of Welfare published this month by Polity Press.

The All-Party Parliamentary Committee on Conflict Issues hosted an event in Westminster on 19 January to present the findings and policy brief arising from this issue. Below is a portion of my presentation at the event, which focused on what the Irish case study can tell us about regional initiatives in cross-border peacebuilding.

Strategically linking peacebuilding initiatives

The primary policy point drawn from this issue of Accord is one that unites all cases and circumstances: To function effectively, it argues, peacebuilding initiatives beyond and below the state need to be strategically linked. Such supra-state/grassroots connections are perhaps particularly difficult in a situation of border conflict given that, by definition, a border conflict is about states, between states, across states. Indeed, when it first directly addressed the issue of the Troubles in 1984, even the EU (then EEC) defined it as: a ‘problem of conflicting national identities’, and suggested that the clue to any lasting improvement must be ‘comprehensive Irish-British understanding’. But fast forward ten years, the IRA and Combined Loyalist Military Command are on ceasefire, Irish nationalists John Hume and Gerry Adams are in talks with the British and Irish governments, just as Prime Minister John Major and Taoiseach Albert Reynolds are in talks with each other. The EU Commission’s response at this time was a special funding programme for Peace and Reconciliation (PEACE) which was to be, in effect, a ‘carrot’ to help actors at all levels in Northern Ireland and the Border Region of Ireland realise the tangible benefits of peace.

Systems not states

The second core action point in the Accord brief asserts: Policy that refers to systems rather than states can shape more flexible and appropriate responses to cross-border conflicts. It is worth acknowledging here that what might be for some a cross-border conflict is to others a domestic issue. This is, of course, a difference of opinion that blocked understanding between the British and Irish governments for the first 15 years of the Troubles. The European Union played a significant part in overcoming this division, partly through normalising collaboration between the two. Arguably, through this experience of elite-level cooperation, a precedent was set for stretching policy visions beyond the border. This has begun to happen at sub-national and local level in Ireland, albeit in a manner wholly dependent on national-level facilitation. States not only have to allow cross-border peacebuilding initiatives: they must also recognise that a systemic, border transcending approach is needed to cement peace. Yet, as we’ve seen in the case of Franco-Spanish approaches to the Basque country, this is often a step too far for some states, even with encouragement from the regional level.

Think local, Act local

The third of Accord’s action points is to: Adjust regional policy according to local contexts, interests and institutions. A most crucial element of the EU’s peacebuilding legacy for Ireland will have been one of the least visible and least possible to quantify. This ‘hidden’ legacy will have been in the conditions EU funding has engendered and required for multilevel partnership. This is not merely a nice idea from European integration theory, it is working in practice in Northern Ireland and the Border Region on a day-to-day basis. Whether such multilevel, multiactor partnerships ultimately stimulate an adjustment of regional policy according to local interests is debatable. But it does help ensure that the influence of the European Union can change practice and norms at the mezzo, if not the macro, level.

Prioritise conflict resolution

I will conclude with a brief note on the fourth of the policy points drawn from this issue of Accord, this being to: Prioritise regional conflict prevention and resolution. Conflict resolution is, of course, a learning process as much as an objective – and perhaps one of the core lessons from the EU’s peacebuilding experience in Ireland is that conflict resolution may be conceived very differently by different local actors. Indeed, even the EU’s very involvement might be seen as highly problematic by some actors. Such actors in Northern Ireland have included no less than the First and Deputy First Ministers, each of whom are from political parties with a history of Euroscepticism.

But EU Commission President Barroso’s strategy to metaphorically embrace the two of them (e.g. through the EU Task Force on Northern Ireland) has been a tremendous example of the personal power of a regional institution. In building a good relationship with Ian Paisley, his successor Peter Robinson, and Martin McGuinness, Barroso may also help grant legitimacy at a different level to, say, a local loyalist youth group seeking PEACE funding or a group of former republican prisoners going for European Social Funded vocational skills training. It is a good illustration of the argument made in this issue of Accord that regional institutions need to work with governments and civil society networks to facilitate local participation and buy-in to peace processes.

Only with such visionary engagement and sustained commitment to conflict resolution from the European Commission might the EU’s legacy endure long after the well of PEACE money runs dry.

For more details on the work of Conciliation Resources and for the Accord issue in full, please see www.c-r.org.